Ups and downs of relations with Russia

COLUMN

print this

By Erkki Pennanen
     
      The old liturgies and diffidence used when discussing relations between Finland and Russia have almost disappeared in Finland - and in Russia as well, where Finland nowadays gets fairly little attention.
      People use real language when they speak of such matters - so much so that many might be tempted to ask what the current state of relations between the two countries really is.
      One astounding development has occurred: Finland recently sent Russia a note about the repeated violation of Finnish airspace by Russian planes. The word "note" has dramatic connotations in Finnish-Russian relations, dating back to the so-called "note crisis" of the early 1960s. Notes are exchanged between countries over fairly mundane matters as well. However, Finland's note to Russia about repeated airspace violations is a somewhat unusual step.
      What makes the sending of the unusual note, and the eventual response to it, even more interesting is that an exceptionally intense surge of official visits between Finland and Russia is taking place in the near future.
      Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen is visiting Moscow next week at the invitation of Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov. He will be accompanied by three other government ministers: Environment Minister Jan-Erik Enestam, Foreign Trade and Development Minister Paula Lehtomäki, and Transport and Communications Minister Leena Luhtanen.
      Next to arrive in Finland will be Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. In July it is apparently the turn of President Vladimir Putin himself, but his visit has not yet been confirmed.
     
Such an accumulation of visits is indisputable proof that relations between the countries are in good shape, and that there is a will to develop them further. There has been speculation in the Russian press recently of the possible resignation of Prime Minister Fradkov, but it would seem to be either groundless or premature. The resignation rumours have been attributed to Putin's dissatisfaction with an internal policy dispute within the government, and the slowness of the implementation of reforms.
      Soon it will have been four years since President Putin visited Finland, even though President Tarja Halonen has tried several times to encourage him to have a "holiday" in our country. During that time Putin has visited Germany in different connections up to several times a year. Contacts between Putin - who speaks German - and Chancellor Gerhard Schröder have been exceptionally close. However, Putin is losing his best ally in the EU, now that Schröder's career as a statesmen is expected to end already in the autumn in early elections.
      Although cooperation between Russia and Germany will certainly continue to be close, it is impossible to imagine that any close relationship could emerge between Putin and Angela Merkel, who grew up in East Germany. The political weight of Germany is on a completely different level from that of Finland from Russia's point of view. Nevertheless, especially in connection with the EU, Putin is likely to learn to respect Finland more as he learns to understand the nature of the EU.
     
The EU has been a difficult negotiating partner for Russia - ultimately much more so than NATO. As Harry Helenius, Finland's Ambassador in Moscow, said in a recent seminar, Russia is beginning only now to slowly understand what the EU really is. The Russian leadership does not actually even have an EU strategy. The Russians are just waiting to see what the EU will do.
      The EU has no trouble setting demands and criteria for Russia, but at the same time it tends to forget a very important fact: Russia is not seeking EU membership, so it is not at the mercy of EU preconditions and demands in the way that membership applicants are.
      The entry of the Baltic Countries and Poland into the European Union has not brought Russia and the EU closer together; on the contrary, it has created new psychological barriers on both sides. These new member countries have not been primarily interested in the improvement of the relations that they or the EU have with Russia. Instead, they have taken a powerful western orientation, and want to use the power of the EU more for pressuring Russia than for the deepening of cooperation.
     
The phenomenon is psychologically understandable, and probably temporary. However, it reflects negatively on relations between Russia and these new member states.
      President Putin's special aide on EU affairs seemed to link Finland with this group of "Russophobic" countries in a TV interview in the autumn. However, this was apparently an ill-considered inaccuracy. In other connections, Russians have hoped that Finland might have a calming influence on the Balts, or that it would serve as a mediator. Finland must not take on such a task; it is too easy to burn one's fingers and get yelled at for the trouble.
      Russia's indifferent attitude toward the repeated violations of Finnish airspace, and toward Finland's complaints about those violations, constitutes very poor handling of relations with Finland. I do not have any deeper information on what is behind all this, but I do not primarily believe in the theory of deliberate political or military aggravation.
      Probably the pilots flying in the air corridor between St. Petersburg and Kaliningrad simply take a very slack attitude toward the boundaries of the corridor without wanting to understand that for Finland the inviolability of the country's own territory is in itself an important principle.
     
The pilots have superiors, who should have taken issue with the violations when complaints were made - at the very latest. Does information in Russia not move from the Foreign Ministry to the Ministry of Defence and the Air Force, or is it a matter of indifference?
      During the presidencies of Urho Kekkonen and Mauno Koivisto, the KGB channel was used for communications in important matters. In this case the soldiers' communications channel was used as well; Chief of Defence, Admiral Juhani Kaskeala, said that he had taken up the matter on his own level.
      The matter would have been a small one, if Russia had given a quick official response, and an apology. One might have imagined that next week's Prime Ministerial visit would have served as an incentive for a more speedy answer. What is wrong with Russia's bureaucracy? Is the fault in interaction between the Foreign Ministry and the military, or is it indifference toward the Finnish note?
      Here in Finland, such an attitude does great harm to relations in the eyes of ordinary people. The old prejudices are nourished again. The most important concrete lesson is that in the future, violations of airspace should be made public immediately, if silent diplomacy is no longer appreciated.
     
Helsingin Sanomat / First published in print 1.6.2005.  


Previously in HS International Edition:
  PM Vanhanen to discuss Russian airspace violations in Moscow today (7.6.2005)
  Russia officially denies - and tacitly admits - airspace violations (2.6.2005)
  Finland demands end to Russian violations of Finnish airspace (1.6.2005)
  PM Vanhanen sees airspace violations as bilateral issue between Finland and Russia (23.5.2005)

ERKKI PENNANEN / Helsingin Sanomat
erkki.pennanen@hs.fi